Prison officer disciplinary process: stages and your rights

In shortMost concerns are settled informally; only some reach a hearing, and fewer still end in dismissal.

Think of the process as a funnel. Many concerns are resolved at the wide end, informally, through a conversation, coaching or mediation. Fewer move to a formal investigation, fewer still to a hearing, and fewer again to dismissal.

The official figures show the narrow end: 248 prison service staff were dismissed for conduct in the 12 months to 30 June 2026, a small fraction of a workforce of tens of thousands. They say nothing about how many investigations took place or ended in lesser outcomes.

The stages below follow the structure of PSI 06/2010 as far as it can be seen.

The public copy of the 2013 re-issue covers the first two in detail and lists the rest only as headings, so each stage is marked with what is verified and what you must confirm. Our pillar guide to prison officer misconduct provides the wider context.

In shortNot every breach becomes formal, and an informal meeting must say so and stop if a formal investigation looks necessary.

The 2013 text says not every breach leads to formal action. If fraud is suspected it may go to Audit under the anti-fraud arrangements instead.

• Resolve the matter informally.
• Treat it as a performance or attendance issue.
• Use mediation, training or coaching.
• Start the formal route.

In shortA commissioning manager sets the scope and appoints the investigator; you should receive the allegation, terms of reference and investigator's name in writing.

When a matter goes formal, a commissioning manager decides the scope. In the 2013 text this is a person with authority set locally by the Governor or Head of Group, not delegated below Band 7.

They must also consider whether you should stay at work, move to alternative duties, go on detached duty or be suspended.

• Set the terms of reference.
• Decide whether specialist input is needed.
• Appoint an investigating officer who must not be a likely witness at a later hearing.
• Register the investigation with Shared Services.

In shortA fact-finding exercise, not a trial: a 28 working day target, 48 hours' written notice of interviews and a typed note.

• Target length28 working daysExtendable only with written, documented justification
• Interview notice48 hoursIn writing, at minimum
• Published case18 Jul to 4 Dec 2024Suspension to report; terms of reference extended four times

The 2013 text says you can be accompanied by a trade union representative or colleague and will be given a typed note of the interview. The report is meant to contain facts only, with interview notes and any disagreements, and goes to the commissioning manager, who decides whether disciplinary action follows.

In practice timescales stretch. In a published tribunal case, an investigation that began with suspension on 18 July 2024 produced a report on 4 December 2024. The tribunal found no unfair prejudice in that case.

In shortThe commissioning manager chooses no action, informal resolution or a hearing; this chapter of the policy is not public, so confirm the options and time limits with HR.

Once the report is in, the commissioning manager decides what happens next. We cannot give detailed options or time limits because this chapter is not publicly visible.

Under general good practice, if a hearing is to be held you should be told in writing what the allegations are and be given the evidence, including witness statements, in advance. The Acas Code says the notification should give sufficient information about the alleged misconduct and include copies of written evidence.

It also says that where feasible different people should carry out the investigation and the hearing.

If no action is taken, the report still goes to Shared Services under the 2013 text. Ask for written confirmation that the matter is closed and what record, if any, is kept.

• No further action.
• An informal or managerial resolution.
• A formal disciplinary hearing.

In shortHearings, penalties and appeals are the least visible chapters: the Moorland case is one example, not a rule.

We know from one published tribunal case that a Governing Governor acted as the disciplinary hearer for a gross misconduct dismissal at HMP Moorland in 2025. That is one case, not a rule. Our guide to the disciplinary hearing goes into detail.

General guidance on outcomes lists no action, a written warning, a final written warning, demotion, dismissal or another solution. The exact list for HMPPS, who can issue each level, how long warnings stay live and the appeal timescales for England and Wales are not publicly verifiable.

For comparison only, SPS warnings are live for 6, 9 and 12 months and NIPS warnings up to 24 months; neither is the English and Welsh rule. Any outcome letter should say how to appeal; the 2013 text provides for a right of appeal against any formal disciplinary decision.

In shortBy law you can bring a colleague, union representative or union official; anyone else needs your employer's agreement.

The companion can address the hearing and confer with you but cannot answer questions for you, and cannot be disciplined for supporting you. You do not have a statutory right to a lawyer at the hearing.

In the Moorland case, the employer agreed to a family member providing support in a separate room on Occupational Health advice, which shows that reasonable adjustments are possible if you ask.

Statutory right

Accompaniment at a disciplinary hearing by a work colleague, a trade union representative or a trade union official.

Only by agreement

A family member or a Citizens Advice adviser can come only if your employer agrees or your contract says so.

POA Legal Advice Scheme

The handbook says legal assistance covers work-related police investigations, prosecutions, disciplinary hearings and inquiries, subject to Legal Aid Committee approval. There is no initial advice for proceedings started or under investigation before you joined or re-joined. The handbook is undated, so confirm the current rule.

In shortFour other processes can run in parallel, and the 2026 tribunal time-limit changes matter.

A criminal investigation takes primacy in corruption cases, with the police senior investigating officer deciding priority. Changes in circumstances, including disciplinary procedures and criminal charges, are to be reported under the security vetting policy.

The Exclusions Register can be used after a dismissal for gross misconduct or misconduct that poses a safety or security risk, and temporary exclusion applies to suspended staff. Employment-law rights, including the right to bring a tribunal claim, apply throughout.

In shortMost avoidable damage comes from a few patterns: speaking before advice, delay, gossip and ignoring procedural problems.

None of this means being adversarial. Procedures work best when everyone behaves reasonably: be on time, be polite, ask for what you are entitled to in writing, and keep a log.

Never destroy or alter evidence, never pressure witnesses and never lie, because that turns a defensible position into an indefensible one. If you made a mistake, a calm, honest account and evidence of insight and learning can matter at the outcome stage; your rep can advise you how to present that.

In shortBecause so much of the process is unpublished, your questions are your best tool.

A small number of questions are worth asking at every stage: What happens next? When? Who decides? What can I do if I disagree? Ask your rep to attend with you and to take notes.

The misconduct process navigator turns this into a stage-by-stage list, and the conduct hub lists related guides, including outcomes and sanctions and appealing a disciplinary outcome.